Mergers, Acquisitions and Divestitures

Subterms

    Latest story

    75 Shares24 Views

    Comcast Explores Spin-Out of Cable Business

    by

    The company’s president, Mike Cavanagh, said the company was also considering finding a partner for its Peacock streaming service.Comcast, one of the nation’s biggest television companies, said on Thursday that it was weighing whether to cleave its cable networks from the rest of the company, a move that could put it in position to shake up the struggling cable industry.Mike Cavanagh, the company’s president, said on an earnings call that the company could put the cable networks owned by its NBCUniversal division — which include Syfy, Bravo and USA — into a new company.As Americans continue to drop their cable TV subscriptions, cable networks are generally considered the most problematic part of traditional media businesses like NBCUniversal.“Like many of our peers in media, we are experiencing the effects of the transition in our video businesses, and we have been studying the best path forward for these assets,” Mr. Cavanagh said.Mr. Cavanagh said that the new company would be owned by Comcast shareholders and that it would be “well capitalized” — implying that it would not be loaded up with debt from its parent company, a common tactic for corporate spinoffs. NBC — a broadcast network owned by Comcast — would probably not fit into the new company.His comments came after Comcast reported a 3.3 percent decrease in net income last quarter, even as revenue increased by 6.5 percent, to $32 billion. The company reported losses of 87,000 U.S. customers for its broadband services compared with the same period last year, and cable TV subscribers continued to decrease. The company’s share price was up nearly 3 percent in midmorning trading.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares82 Views

      in Elections

      Profits Leap at Goldman Sachs as Banks See Steady Economy

      by

      The investment bank earned more than expected in the latest quarter, a theme for other big banks, too.Goldman Sachs on Tuesday reported a monster jump in its third quarter earnings, reaping $3 billion in profits — far higher than what Wall Street analysts had expected.How did the investment bank do it? The steadying economic environment helped — but so did a financial maneuver employed by Goldman’s chief executive, David M. Solomon, a few weeks ago.In early September, Mr. Solomon publicly sounded the alarm, saying many aspects of the bank’s business were stumbling in the third quarter. He warned that the bank’s upcoming earnings might disappoint.They didn’t — not at Goldman nor the two other major banks that reported results on Tuesday.Up first, a billion-dollar beatGoldman pulled in nearly $13 billion in revenue during the third quarter, over $1 billion more than projections. The bank’s $3 billion in quarterly profit was roughly equal to what it pulled in during the previous quarter, despite Mr. Solomon’s warning last month that profits might not hold up as well as they had in the first half of the year.A bank executive, briefing reporters on the condition of anonymity, said that trading activity — a core part of any investment bank — came in stronger than expected in September, the same period that the Federal Reserve announced a large cut in interest rates.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 63 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Can Lina Khan Hold On?

      by

      Ms. Khan’s term as the chair of the Federal Trade Commission ended Wednesday. In a wide-ranging interview, she discussed her aggressive approach to antitrust and its critics.From Wall Street to Silicon Valley, everyone wants to know what’s next for Lina Khan.On Wednesday, the youngest-ever chair of the Federal Trade Commission reached the end of her three-year term, during which she helped to overhaul the government’s approach to antitrust enforcement and brought a slew of lawsuits against major corporations.Ms. Khan, 35, can remain in her seat indefinitely, unless she is replaced. There are factions rooting loudly for each of those outcomes.Under her leadership, the F.T.C. has brought antitrust cases against the tech giants Meta, Amazon and Microsoft, sometimes employing ambitious legal arguments. The agency has tried to ban almost all noncompete clauses and blocked Lockheed Martin and Nvidia from making multibillion-dollar deals.A powerful bipartisan cohort believes the F.T.C. chair is stretching the scope of antitrust law past its legitimate limits, rashly working to redefine the bounds of key concepts such as monopolization.Ms. Khan, her staff and her allies essentially contend the opposite: that her leadership is restoring the role of robust, active antitrust enforcement in a legal and economic system that for too long has let those regulatory muscles atrophy to the detriment of consumers and healthier market competition. Consumer watchdogs and some conservatives have cheered on Ms. Khan, defending her populist moves, like the agency’s recent warning to makers of inhalers that their aggressive use of patent loopholes may violate federal law.Some Democratic donors connected to finance and tech, however, have publicly campaigned for Vice President Kamala Harris to remove Ms. Khan as chair of the F.T.C., if she wins the presidential election in November. Her campaign declined to comment on whether she would support Ms. Khan’s staying in the position.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Motel 6 Is Sold to Oyo, an Indian Hotel Company Expanding in the U.S.

      by

      A roadside chain for more than 50 years, Motel 6 was owned by Blackstone, the private equity giant. Oyo will pay $525 million in an all-cash deal.Motel 6, the budget hotel chain that has lined American highways for decades, will be sold to Oyo, an India-based hotel operator, the companies announced on Friday.Blackstone, the private equity giant and the owner of Motel 6’s parent company, said the transaction would be an all-cash deal for $525 million. The deal is expected to close before the end of the year, and would include the chain’s offshoot hotel brand, Studio 6.Oyo expanded into the United States in 2019, and has recently ramped up efforts to expand further. It currently operates more than 300 hotels domestically. The company, which specializes in budget hotels and proudly describes itself as “a start-up,” had received a large investment from SoftBank. But some troubling incidents in India in recent years raised questions about some of its business practices.Motel 6 was founded in 1962 in Santa Barbara, Calif., and has been an indelible part of Americana for its basic accommodations. The Motel 6 name originally came from the company’s offering of an all-cash $6-a-night rate. Motel 6 and Studio 6 currently have roughly 1,500 hotels across the United States and Canada, Blackstone said.Gautam Swaroop, the chief executive of Oyo International, praised Motel 6’s “strong brand recognition, financial profile and network in the U.S.” He added, “This acquisition is a significant milestone for a start-up company like us to strengthen our international presence.”Blackstone purchased Motel 6 in 2012 for $1.9 billion.“This transaction is a terrific outcome for investors and is the culmination of an ambitious business plan that more than tripled our investors’ capital and generated over $1 billion in profit over our hold period,” Rob Harper, a senior managing director at Blackstone, said in a statement. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The Guardian in Talks to Sell The Observer to Tortoise Media

      by

      The Observer, first published in 1791, could be bought by Tortoise Media, an outlet founded by a British media veteran that began publishing in 2019.The parent company of The Guardian said on Tuesday that it was in formal talks to sell The Observer, Britain’s oldest surviving Sunday newspaper, to the start-up Tortoise Media.A deal would signal that Guardian Media Group is willing to shed a pillar of the British media landscape — The Observer has run in print since 1791 — as it increasingly focuses on news of worldwide interest, delivered digitally.In an internal memo to employees, leaders of Guardian Media said that Tortoise had approached them with a “compelling” offer to buy The Observer. The approximately 70 employees of the Sunday publication were told about the talks on Tuesday.A final deal could be reached within about three months, according to a person briefed on the talks, who was not authorized to discuss the details publicly. The negotiations are ongoing and may not end in an agreement.For years, The Guardian, which was founded in Manchester in 1821, has sought to establish itself as a global media company. It established a digital U.S. edition in 2007, and has sought to expand aggressively across the Atlantic.Executives at The Guardian said that a deal to sell The Observer, which the company bought in 1993, would allow their company to focus even more on international expansion.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      How Swing State Politics Are Sinking a Global Steel Deal

      by

      As the Biden administration nears a decision to block the proposed acquisition of U.S. Steel, the debate over national and economic security is being dwarfed by presidential politics.The Biden administration has spent the past three years promoting a policy of “friend-shoring,” which aims to contain China and Russia by forging closer ties with U.S. allies like Europe and Japan.That policy appears to stop at the state lines of Pennsylvania.As the administration nears a decision to block the proposed acquisition of the Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel, the traditional debate over national security and economic security is being dwarfed by a more powerful force: presidential politics.Legal experts, Wall Street analysts and economists expressed concern about the precedent that would be set if President Biden uses executive power to block a company from an allied nation from buying an American business. They warn that scuttling the $15 billion transaction would be an extraordinary departure from the nation’s culture of open investment — one that could lead international corporations to reconsider their U.S. investments.“This was a purely political decision, and one that stomps on the Biden administration’s stated focus on building alliances among like-minded countries to advance the economic competition with China,” said Christopher B. Johnstone, a senior adviser and the Japan chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “At the end of the day, it represents pure protectionism that draws no apparent distinction between our friends and our adversaries.”Administration officials such as Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen, who leads a government panel that is reviewing the steel deal, have espoused the benefits of deepening economic ties with U.S. allies to make supply chains more resilient. Those sentiments are being disregarded in the heat of an election year, where domestic political dynamics take priority.The Biden administration has been under pressure to find a way to justify blocking the Nippon acquisition amid backlash against the deal from the powerful steelworkers’ union. The labor organization believes that Nippon, which has pledged to invest in Pennsylvania factories and preserve jobs, could jeopardize pension agreements and lay off employees.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More